Arizona Beverage Class Action Says Fruit Snacks Aren’t ‘All Natural’

A class action lawsuit challenges Arizona Beverage Co.’s advertising that its gummy fruit snacks are “all natural.”

The Arizona Beverage class action lawsuit was filed by Christopher Silva who says he purchased the fruit snacks believing them to contain no synthetic ingredients due to being marketed as “all natural.”

Allegedly, the fruit snacks do contain synthetic ingredients, contrary to advertising.

Silva says Arizona Beverage’s labeling of the fruit snacks as “all natural” amounts to false advertising because they contain multiple synthetic ingredients, though reasonable consumers would assume that the snacks are all natural.

To support his claim that the fruit snacks are not all natural, Silva lists the ingredients in the fruit snacks that he says are not all natural.

According to Silva, these ingredients include citric acid, gelatin, ascorbic acid,  dextrose, glucose syrup, modified food starch, and modified corn starch.

Silva argues that these cannot be considered all natural because they are formulated or manufactured “by a chemical process or by a process that chemically changes a substance extracted from naturally occurring plants, animals, or mineral sources,” as the federal government reportedly defines synthetic ingredients.

The fruit snack class action lawsuit argues that consumers have a preference for “all natural” foods because they are seen as healthier, of higher quality, and more desirable than synthetic foods. Silva says that this preference leads consumers to be willing to pay a premium for these foods.

According to the gummy fruit snack class action lawsuit, Arizona Beverage takes advantage of customers’ preference for all natural foods and advertises the fruit snacks as such in an effort to increase profits.

However, the Arizona Beverage snacks class action lawsuit asserts that in so doing, the company passed off a less valuable product for a more valuable product.

Silva then goes on to say that consumers have no choice but to trust a seller’s representation of their product as being natural or synthetic.

In this case, he and other consumers allegedly had to rely on Arizona Beverage Co.’s false representation of their product in order to make their purchasing decision. 

Silva notes that, though the synthetic ingredients are listed on the back of the fruit snacks’ packaging, consumers are not expected to closely inspect the ingredient list of a product before buying and instead rely on the front of the packaging.

Allegedly, Silva and other customers were financially injured by Arizona Beverage Co.’s mislabeling because had they known the fruit snacks were not all natural, they would not have purchased them or would not have paid as much for them as they did.

Do you buy fruit snacks? Tell us about your preferences in the comments below.

Silva is represented by Jospeh Lipari of the Sultzer Law Group PC.

The Arizona Beverage Fruit Snack Class Action Lawsuit is Silva v. Cornell Brewing Co., et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-00756, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York.

Read More Lawsuit & Settlement News:

Veterans Disability Benefits Class Action Heard in Federal Court

How Do I Appeal a Prudential Long-Term Disability Denial?

GetARoom.com Class Action Alleges Deceptive Hotel Booking Methods

Is Aurobindo Valsartan Recalled?